Soldato
I was intrigued to read in a novel that mortuary fridges that were once racked three high are now two high and are wider for the fat corpses they are receiving today. Need bigger mortuaries.
Obesity
- Thread starter Uther
- Start date
Oh of course, but we were talking about the differences between the same calories but different foods. And just from an energy supply POV, without even going into the differences with nutrients, gut health, hormone & behavioural influences etc etc
Caporegime
But that's using rather extreme examples, and even if we only look at obese people, for most of them the processing, using and storing of 2000 calories will be much closer.
Most people who are overweight don't live on thousands of calories of milkshakes and cakes. They are just eating too much of relatively normal foods that are still reasonably nutritious.
A calorie is just a unit of energy.
The issue is you can pile down 1500 calories and then be hungry an hour later. The type of food matters a lot, also many people are eating because it makes them feel good, they arent hungry they just like the dopamine spike they get from eating crap.
Man of Honour
Yes they are. Your brain and body doesn't process the poor quality food the same way. Furthermore they have detrimental health effects on hormones, lipid profiles and gut microbiomes.
As I said people are to blame. But the cheapness of UPF makes it easier for the lazy people to be lazy.
Not all calories are the same, and I urge you to research nutrition a little more and how your body and brain and guts process foods. If a food doesn't trigger a certain enzyme then your body doesn't digest or absorb nutrients the same way. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
Last edited:
Agreed, but it was intentionally extreme to show why "2000 cals is 2000 cals" isn't quite as simple as that. I even did say it's a good rule of thumb, but a bit more nuanced than just that.
Absolutely, but it does stray into a different aspect of obesity when you are talking of the pyschological reasons why people overeat and intentionally created addictive foods, though of course it's all part of the whole picture that needs to be tackled.
Man of Honour
Wrong. A fit person will be more efficient at burning calories and not using muscle tissue to fuel the body. Better glycogen usage etc... it really isn't that simple.
People have to want to move though, when it's easier for a lot of them to just order a Big Mac and get it delivered.
Man of Honour
Indeed. I bet most people could eat 1000 calories of cake, but would struggle to eat 1000 calories of vegetables
fibre and proteins are such an important part of a healthy diet.
You're playing devil advocate here right? If not, I can see why we have these problems in society. Seems like education is key.
Last edited:
I wonder what would happen if firms in the UK were required by law to reduce obesity. Would be a ballsy move by the government.
The annual checkups is a good idea. Interesting that it tops out at 75.
Soldato
The food you eat has other stuff in it which alters how things are absorbed or digested in extremely complex ways.
Fibre is inedible,. However KCAL labels on products are calculated from burning it in a lab and measuring the energy.
Caporegime
I am lazy (for exercise)....which is why I create scenarios where I have to move. I could drive to work, but since last July I have started to walk instead. 5.5km of walking daily as a byproduct of not driving.
I used to go for runs, 5km round the neighbourhood 3 times a week but that took a lot more motivation. Like getting changed and put on running shoes was a chore, but putting on normal clothes walking is just normal. I also had to get to work, whereas I didn't have to run.
Last edited:
Associate
Stuff like this doesn't help, trying to normalise being obese as perfectly fine.
I also blame food manufacturers as well. Ultra processed food and snacks are honed by engineers to hit all the right receptors to make people keep eating it. Purely all done for profit. Human's never had to content with that in the past.
Speaking of Dr's pointing out weight issues. There's a Columbian (I think) Dr called Dr Now. He's on some TV show where he doesn't mince his words, it's quite funny.
There was some american guy who was something like 40 stone, and he goes "I think it's just water retention.." Dr Now, just looks at him with disbelief.. "I just don't want to get malnourished.." Dr Now: "Do you look like you are malnourished!?"
We need more straight talking attitude like that.
Edit:
Found the video
After A Bad Weigh-In, Lee Gets Into An Argument With His Doctor
#My600lbLife | Wednesdays at 8/7cLee gets into an argument with Dr. Nowzaradan when he doesn't meet his weight loss goals.Full Episodes Streaming FREE: https...www.youtube.com
How did they get away with stating that is healthy? disgusting.
My mum was obese, she died young (62) because of it and didn't have the best of health for many years prior to her death because of it which impacted her quality of life. Being obese should never be promoted as healthy, it simply isn't.
There will be many people who regret making the choice of stuffing their faces excessively and not exercising enough as they age and the plethora of health issues hit them. Granted you can get health issues if you're classed as normal size too alas the obese will have regret as it'd be down to choices they made as to why they're ill.
I can see in my kids just how addictive junk food is, i.e. sweets, crisps etc. They have a very restricted amount of these but are constantly asking for it. Rarely do they ask to snack on fruit or boiled eggs or a healthy option. That said now and then my 6year old will choose fruit for pudding at school but it is probably only 15% of the time at best.
Caporegime
Indeed. I bet most people could eat 1000 calories of cake, but would struggle to eat 1000 calories of vegetables
According to another user on here, fibre isn't necessary and you just need huge amounts of fat in a no-carb or low-carb diet to solve all your problems.
That's why these discussions about calories tend to devolve into conversations about diets like keto, despite numerous reports from people where this diet doesn't work for them and causes other problems. It always seems to go to extremes.
Last edited:
When I was younger, a sign of poverty is someone who was skinny and underweight. Now a sign of poverty is someone who is overweight. Crazy how times have changed.
When I lived in the UK, every few shops you see were the £2 chicken and chips shops.
I see kids walking around looking like Michelin Man, women are getting bigger every year. Yet we have so many 24/7 gyms around the country
People are that fat, lazy and society just accept it now as normal.
When I lived in the UK, every few shops you see were the £2 chicken and chips shops.
I see kids walking around looking like Michelin Man, women are getting bigger every year. Yet we have so many 24/7 gyms around the country
People are that fat, lazy and society just accept it now as normal.
Last edited:
Associate
I think lots of the problem ironically comes from the "gym" culture. Not as in healthy functional strength that Aristole says is desirable to have, but 15 years of cheap film/media which shows the average man as a hulking heman which leads to a general consensus of bigger being better even if its not gym.
In the 80s you had "freaks" like Arnold etc that were basically outliers known for their physique, the average movie star was slim and lightly muscled. Nowadays the average actor is tall, broad shouldered and huge way beyond the average person. Being slim was then confused with being skinny for lots of men and expectations changed.
I fell into this trap myself where I convinced myself that being well over 190 something centimetres meant that being in the healthy BMI range was just skinny. My weight went up and up and I felt comfortable being "bulkier" even though most of it wasn't probably muscle. I have now learned that being slimmer is actually just more normal. I have an average frame so that's just that. Now I sit below 100kg and yes I think I do still feel "skinny" but I know its probably a lot healthier for me..
I just googled the BMI (take with pinch of salz I guess) and it says for 192.5cm a healthy range is 70kg-90kg. Incredible.
In the 80s you had "freaks" like Arnold etc that were basically outliers known for their physique, the average movie star was slim and lightly muscled. Nowadays the average actor is tall, broad shouldered and huge way beyond the average person. Being slim was then confused with being skinny for lots of men and expectations changed.
I fell into this trap myself where I convinced myself that being well over 190 something centimetres meant that being in the healthy BMI range was just skinny. My weight went up and up and I felt comfortable being "bulkier" even though most of it wasn't probably muscle. I have now learned that being slimmer is actually just more normal. I have an average frame so that's just that. Now I sit below 100kg and yes I think I do still feel "skinny" but I know its probably a lot healthier for me..
I just googled the BMI (take with pinch of salz I guess) and it says for 192.5cm a healthy range is 70kg-90kg. Incredible.
Associate
Well done. Walking or cycling to work if possible is a great way to get some exercise in with minimising lost free time as much as possible. I cycle 6 miles each way to work. Whilst my journey to work is 10mins slowed than in a car on the way home on most days the journey is quicker on the bike. You're not only doing yourself a favour either. That length journey isn't great for cars. You're showing it much more mechanical sympathy leaving it parked up at home
Caporegime
I also noted that they all "fast", I do wonder why they need to fast...the answer must be they put on weight...?